The transmission of the Dzogchen lineage has been passed down through Garab Dorje and the Bon masters. I believe the debate is more in line if being a Buddhist is necessary to practice Dzogchen. Nobody is debating the importance of the lineage of transmission, though. I am not critisizing your ideas on tulpas- although I don't think that it would be exactly correct from a Dzogchen POV to say that all we are is a generated thought form. I do have doubts about some of these Dzogchen teachers that are cropping up that "teach" without this vital link of transmission- which happened to come down to us through Buddhsim and Bon. I am thinking along the lines of Candice O'Denver here, I have no clue who your teacher is so I do not wish to make any assumtions.

... And Dzogchen transmission. I practice the Yangzab which is a whole terma cycle comprising of Maha, Anu, and Ati yoga that is only practiced within the Drikung Kagyu. Of course, this may be one of the only exceptions (besides maybe the Karma Nyingtig). Not trying to nitpick, but the Yangzab is a legitimate Dzogchen lineage within the Kagyu that can be traced back to Guru Rinpoche. Its pretty awesome, really.

Dronma wrote: There are Dzogchenpas in all lineages of Tibetan Buddhism!However, traditionally Dzogchen is transmitted through Nyingma. Kagyu lineage keeps Mahamudra transmission.

My understanding is that although Dzogchen is practised on an individual basis in all the Tibetan schools, its role within the Kagyu tradition is rather more significant. Mahamudra is certainly their main practice, just as Dzogchen is the principal practice of the Nyingma, however within the Kagyu tradition there has always been an important sub-school called 'Kagyu-Nyingma' who practice Dzogchen, and are in every respect identical to the Nyingma, apart from having a traditional allegiance to the descendants of Lord Marpa. So a list of traditions that practice Dzogchen should read: Nyingma, Bon and Kagyu.

Some scholars say that termas are by definition Nyingma--even if promulgated by lamas outside the Nyingma lineage. So even a Karmapa's termas are Nyingma. Dzogchen is usually taught via terma literature these days. If we have faith that the Dzogchen tantras are from India, then the Nyingma lineage holds this as part of the Kama, and the Kagyu lamas who hold it have received it in a line that can be traced back to a Nyingma lama. It would be a good question for Ponlop RInpoche or Garchen Rinpoche, etc... how they view that.

As I already said, there are Dzogchenpas in all lineages of Tibetan Buddhism! A few brilliant examples are: the Third Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje (Kagyu), The Fifth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Dalai Lamas (Gelug). However, focusing our concern too much in the lineages, it can be a big obstacle for the practice of Dzogchen itself.

“The Dzogchen teachings are neither a philosophy, nor a religious doctrine, nor a cultural tradition. Understanding the message of the teachings means discovering one’s own true condition stripped of all the self-deceptions and falsifications which the mind creates. The very meaning of the Tibetan term “Dzogchen”, or “Great Perfection”, refers to the true primordial state of every individual and not to any transcendent reality.Dzogchen is not a school or sect, or a religious system. It is simply a state of knowledge which masters have transmitted beyond any limits of sect or monastic tradition. In the lineage of the Dzogchen teachings there have been masters belonging to all social classes, including farmers, nomads, nobles, monks and great religious figures, from every spiritual tradition or sect.Dzogchen does not depend on externals; rather it is a teaching about the essentials of the human condition. Since the Dzogchen teachings are not dependent on culture, they can be taught, understood and practiced in any cultural context. To be a practitioner of Dzogchen, one does not need to change anything externally – one’s clothes, one’s job or one’s way of life.In the Dzogchen teachings we talk of ‘being aware’, which means we work with our circumstances: we see how they manifest and then we do our best. It is not always easy to understand a situation and know the best way to act, but we always try to do our best. And by doing practice, we develop more clarity.The Dzogchen teachings say that the most important thing is discovering our real nature of mind. But first we must discover our own everyday mind. If we never discover in a real sense our own mind and its limitations, then we are jumping too quickly into the real nature of mind. So it is very, very important that we first actually understand our real condition and also our relative condition: our physical body, our energy, and our mind, and how these relate to our existence and our own world with all its problems.”

As I already said, there are Dzogchenpas in all lineages of Tibetan Buddhism! A few brilliant examples are: the Third Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje (Kagyu), The Fifth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Dalai Lamas (Gelug). However, focusing our concern too much in the lineages, it can be a big obstacle for the practice of Dzogchen itself.

“The Dzogchen teachings are neither a philosophy, nor a religious doctrine, nor a cultural tradition. Understanding the message of the teachings means discovering one’s own true condition stripped of all the self-deceptions and falsifications which the mind creates. The very meaning of the Tibetan term “Dzogchen”, or “Great Perfection”, refers to the true primordial state of every individual and not to any transcendent reality.Dzogchen is not a school or sect, or a religious system. It is simply a state of knowledge which masters have transmitted beyond any limits of sect or monastic tradition. In the lineage of the Dzogchen teachings there have been masters belonging to all social classes, including farmers, nomads, nobles, monks and great religious figures, from every spiritual tradition or sect.Dzogchen does not depend on externals; rather it is a teaching about the essentials of the human condition. Since the Dzogchen teachings are not dependent on culture, they can be taught, understood and practiced in any cultural context. To be a practitioner of Dzogchen, one does not need to change anything externally – one’s clothes, one’s job or one’s way of life.In the Dzogchen teachings we talk of ‘being aware’, which means we work with our circumstances: we see how they manifest and then we do our best. It is not always easy to understand a situation and know the best way to act, but we always try to do our best. And by doing practice, we develop more clarity.The Dzogchen teachings say that the most important thing is discovering our real nature of mind. But first we must discover our own everyday mind. If we never discover in a real sense our own mind and its limitations, then we are jumping too quickly into the real nature of mind. So it is very, very important that we first actually understand our real condition and also our relative condition: our physical body, our energy, and our mind, and how these relate to our existence and our own world with all its problems.”

Ironically, by setting up a sub-forum outside of all four main schools of Tibetan Buddhism named "Dzogchen", one could be viewed as creating a new school or sect called "Dzogchen." Such is the nature of language and labeling and the human brain and emotions. This kind of designation of Dzogchen as a fourth (or fifth, or sixth...) school of Tibetan Buddhism, is unprecedented, and ripe with the possibility of reifying someone as the defacto "Head of the Dzogchen School," and other kinds of politics. When Dzogchen itself becomes a flag one can wave around, it is no longer Dzogchen.

Dronma wrote:As I already said, there are Dzogchenpas in all lineages of Tibetan Buddhism! A few brilliant examples are: the Third Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje (Kagyu), The Fifth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Dalai Lamas (Gelug).

The reality is that there are three traditions that have Dzogchen; Nyingma, Bon and Kagyu. Certainly, there have been one or two isolated individuals who have practiced Dzogchen in the Sakya and Gelug, such as the Dalai Lamas that you have mentioned, but they have all been noteworthy and exceptional for this very fact...this is a totally different situation from the Kagyu sect in which Dzogchen has always been a major sub-school. The Kagyu specialise in the Mahamudra, but they also have Dzogchen, to such a significant extent that there is no question whatsoever that they can be classified as a Dzogchen tradition.

Yudron wrote:Ironically, by setting up a sub-forum outside of all four main schools of Tibetan Buddhism named "Dzogchen", one could be viewed as creating a new school or sect called "Dzogchen." Such is the nature of language and labeling and the human brain and emotions. This kind of designation of Dzogchen as a fourth (or fifth, or sixth...) school of Tibetan Buddhism, is unprecedented, and ripe with the possibility of reifying someone as the defacto "Head of the Dzogchen School," and other kinds of politics. When Dzogchen itself becomes a flag one can wave around, it is no longer Dzogchen.

I suppose you're right, vajra sister. We can see how this has happened with the early or "nyingma" translation period's teachings: all those whose focus of practice is on this first period of teachings in Tibet--which includes all streams of Dzogchen transmission that ever flowed to any Buddhist school--are practicing the ancient or "nyingma" teachings... whether they're card-carrying "nyingmapas" or not. But human minds grabbed onto this distinction and now we think of the teachings characterizing this period as a single, homogeneous "school" because those of us that practice these teachings obviously share the same original lineage masters (Garab Dorje, Manjushrimitra, Shri Singha, Jnanasutra, Padmasmbhava, Vimalamitra, Shantarakshita, and so on), so our approach to practice is only ever superficially different.

Don't get me wrong, though. I think it's fine that we rally around our capital N "Nyingma-ness" and even think of it as a school (as long as this doesn't involve thinking of our school as better than others, of course), and of course due to the cultural revolution the practitioners of the Dharma of the early translation period really did need a leader. But the one unfortunate part of all this is that because we and others came to think of nyingma as a school, if a so-called nyingmapa says "all termas are nyingma" or "all Dzogchen is essentially nyingma," this is received by non-"nyingmapas" as "your school just borrowed that Dzogchen stuff from us and your school would be incomplete if it wasn't for us." When in reality, it just means that all Buddhist termas and Dzogchen come in an unbroken stream originally springing from Samantabhadra --> Garab Dorje -- Padma, Vima, & Vairo, etc. to our present day masters of the various traditions.

So, long story short, all you non-Nyingmapas reading this, please know that we "Nyingmapas" understand full well that termas and Dzogchen can only be said to belong to those from whom their transmission originally flowed and those who've received their transmission.. but certainly not to some school.

I appreciate Pema Rigdzin's insightful post. This is an interesting topic that I have struggled with for some time. As I mentioned, my main practice is the Yangzab terma, which by definition is 100 percent Nyingma- although it is only practiced within the Drikung Kagyu lineage. The terma was revealed by the 17th throne holder of the Drikung, Rhinchen Phuntsok. Like all termas it originates with Guru Rinpoche. It includes practices of Maha, Anu, and Ati. So does that make me a Nyingmapa? Kagyupa... both? Silly questions, for sure. Pema answers the question quite nicely, I believe. Thank you.

Pema Rigdzin wrote:we "Nyingmapas" understand full well that termas and Dzogchen can only be said to belong to those from whom their transmission originally flowed and those who've received their transmission.. but certainly not to some school.

schools can be distinguished by for instance the object of guru yoga in sadhana, and approach to emptiness in commentarial tradition. gter.ma is situated by a specific source, and has a specific destination in time and space. arrival at destination is ensured by methods of concealment and guardianship. source of gter.ma may deviate from an object of guru yoga typically specified by lineage. an approach to emptiness implicit in some method specified by a gter.ma or some rdzogs.chen text may seem inconsistent with the approach traditionally taught, may require philosophical elision or apologetics in explanation, or may require some semantic distortion of rdzogs.chen view for use without raising reasonable and categorical qualms. benefit of ris.med is that such deviations and innovations do not have to result in conflict among students and teachers, and avoid social implications of ascendancy, dominance, or superiority

to the extent a school is a school of thought, and not particularly a school of people, gter.ma and rdzogs.chen can be included and can be excluded by choice

if there is a we it is defined more or less as -a we of us, that is not those of them, of those who define them as some group that is not ussome of us prefer not even a we of us, such that we or those, and us or them, do not applysome of them prefer to ignore those of them who define, such that us or them do not apply

Pema Rigdzin wrote:....When in reality, it just means that all Buddhist termas and Dzogchen come in an unbroken stream originally springing from Samantabhadra --> Garab Dorje -- Padma, Vima, & Vairo, etc. to our present day masters of the various traditions.

So, long story short, all you non-Nyingmapas reading this, please know that we "Nyingmapas" understand full well that termas and Dzogchen can only be said to belong to those from whom their transmission originally flowed and those who've received their transmission.. but certainly not to some school.

Thank you, Pema Rigdzin!

"My view is as vast as the sky, but my actions are finer than flour" ~ Padmasambhava ~

It is thought that Gampopa received Dzogchen instructions and incorporated them into his teachings esp Mahamudra. Later Kagyu scholars were somewhat dismissive of Dzogchen. My understanding is that back in 11th century Tibet the exchange of teachings and lineages was more fluid. Today the Dzogchen transmission is working well and it is intact. Thanks to all the unbiased Masters of the past, present and future. When you try to find a Kagyu you can't find a kagyu. Nothing is what it seems.

The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.

dorjeshonnu wrote:waking up does not require the making of new boxes to contain objects

I don't know about "others" but actually this is teaching for me. There cannot be nondual nature/freedom from suffering from within my box. Certainly awaken masters use very sharp sword to free from enslaving suffering ideas.Then no need to say my Sangha, but Sangha is easier in emerging the teachings of no separation emptiness-dependence in which no borders are available.